URGENT: Vote on TA spec 1.0.2

[Duane Nickull <duane@xmlglobal.com>]

Klaus/Steering Committee and Executive Committee:

You are correct as to the procedure.

We (ebXML) need to get this TA specification approved.  I think it is
important, not only for the image of ebXML, but to aide with future
ebXML deliverables.  Therefore, we have to look at the possibilities for
approval:

1.  Wait until the next meeting after Vancouver

2.  Modify the procedure or make an exception in order to facilitate
this spec being voted on in Vancouver.  

3.  Modify the procedure so the spec can be voted on after the Vancouver
meeting but before the next meeting.

Option #1 follows procedures however, it doesn't help advance the causes
of ebXML.  I think most are in agreement that we need to deliver
something.

Option #2 does not follow the rules but I personally favour it.  The
entire ebXML plenary has had a recent two week period which they all had
full access to the spec.  Many either never read it or decided that it
was fine the way it was.  The comments submitted by most active
participants were realtively minor and did not result in any major re
writing. ALL have been addressed and documented. 

In light of the small changes, and the full access plenary members have
to the document now, I think it would not be unreasonable to recognize
the importance of this specification to the overall well being of ebXML
and make a provisional change to the process.  The document, and ALL
change logs, can go out tomorrow for full review by the plenary for
voting on in Vancouver.

The change logs themselves should be sufficient to review before making
a decision.

If the spec goes out tomorrow, people have 6 days to review it before
the opening plenary in Vancouver, then another 4 days before the
Thursday night review and then a final vote on Friday.

*Please*, let's consider this as an option and, if we decide to proceed,
have an executive committee vote on this tomorrow (barring any oposition
from the Steering Committee).  If no one objects,  there should be no
problem due to the public stature in which this document currently
resides.

Option #3 is not favourable to me. 

A number of people have worked almost full time on this specification to
get it ready for the vote. It would really be a shame for us to miss the
Vancouver opportunity by one week and have to wait until the next
meeting.

Duane Nickull